mental health and the government

[Mojo Hand 4580]

This is chilling 

 

[Biff Tannen 45497]

2 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

This is chilling 

 

So pre-crime?

[SmokeyTheBear 5562]

Imagine if Obama....

[Incredulity 11555]

7 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

This is chilling 

 

SOMEBODY DO SOMETHING!!!!!!

 

NOT THAT !!!1!!!1

[David Dennison 18659]

2 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

SOMEBODY DO SOMETHING!!!!!!

 

NOT THAT !!!1!!!1

That's not doing anything.

[Anastasis 23394]

The HARPA initiative and the concept behind it, a DARPA-like academic-public-private push to advance biomedical research with specific and targeted goals to address healthcare needs in cancer, neurodegenerative disorders, and mental health, is worth a look. Using advanced analytics to identify a wide variety of factors associated with violence. Chilling.

Edited August 23, 2019 by Anastasis

[MissingInAction 24824]

28 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

This is chilling 

 

They will use this to round up whomever they want, whenever they want. Not that these Nazis aren't doing it already. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

Don't worry, guys, Trump's people are promising they won't do this without permission! 

 

The document goes on to list a number of widely used technologies it suggests could be employed to help collect data, including Apple Watches, Fitbits, Amazon Echo and Google Home. The document also mentions “powerful tools” collected by health-care provides like fMRIs, tractography and image analysis.

On totally unrelated news, Trump wants to build a bunch of mental institutions to lock up people who might someday commit a crazy gun crime.   That way we don't have to restrict the availability of guns at all! 

 

[Anastasis 23394]

Y'all are legit lunatics.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

Y'all are legit lunatics.

Don't report me to HARPA, bro

[Brisketexan 104628]

Y'all are legit lunatics.

I kinda thought you were big in invasion of privacy and govt monitoring and whatnot.

[Lagunamadre 1975]

37 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

This is chilling 

 

Trump's precogs would be Hannity, Carlson and Bongino. 

[Anastasis 23394]

Just now, Brisketexan said:

I kinda thought you were big in invasion of privacy and govt monitoring and whatnot.

What exactly does a DARPA-like initiative to engage healthcare research conducted according to the principles and regulations that guide the ethical conduct of medical research have to do with invasion of privacy and government monitoring? WTF are you talking about. Jesus Christ, engage your brain for one second.  

[texas08 1599]

The right all of the sudden wants the governments cock all up in their ass. Fucking fascists.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

5 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

What exactly does a DARPA-like initiative to engage healthcare research conducted according to the principles and regulations that guide the ethical conduct of medical research have to do with invasion of privacy and government monitoring? WTF are you talking about. Jesus Christ, engage your brain for one second.  

Did you actually read he story?   If invasion of privacy and government monitoring have nothing to do with it, why is the promise not to invade privacy with government monitoring literally the cornerstone of the project?   Engage your brain, indeed:

 

“Privacy must be safeguarded. Profiling must be avoided. Data protection capabilities will be the cornerstone of this effort.”[/] 

 

[Anastasis 23394]

Just now, Mojo Hand said:

Did you actually read he story?   If invasion of privacy and government monitoring have nothing to do with it, why is the promise not to invade privacy with government monitoring literally the cornerstone of the project?   Engage your brain, indeed:

Confidentiality and privacy are two cornerstone principles of ethical healthcare research.  They are required matters that must be proactively addressed in every study involving human subjects research. The mention in one acontextual quote you lift really does nothing for your position. You literally have to promise that you will maintain privacy and confidentiality in every study application. (See also: 45 CFR 46 AKA the Common Rule; Belmont Report).

Amazing watching you twist yourself into a pretzel on this one over the Orange Man.  You are essentially arguing a position that would place yourself in opposition to all forms of government involvement in biomedical research. I know that you don't believe that. But you read an article on WaPo this morning and are chilled. 

[SmokeyTheBear 5562]

8 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Confidentiality and privacy are two cornerstone principles of ethical healthcare research.  They are required matters that must be proactively addressed in every study involving human subjects research. The mention in one acontextual quote you lift really does nothing for your position. You literally have to promise that you will maintain privacy and confidentiality in every study application. (See also: 45 CFR 46 AKA the Common Rule; Belmont Report).

Amazing watching you twist yourself into a pretzel on this one over the Orange Man.  You are essentially arguing a position that would place yourself in opposition to all forms of government involvement in biomedical research. I know that you don't believe that. But you read an article on WaPo this morning and are chilled. 

But what if the Intel community wants the info for FISA warrants?

[Anastasis 23394]

3 minutes ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

But what if the Intel community wants the info for FISA warrants?

I don't believe that the NSA, CIA or FBI should vacuum up data collected during the conduct of biomedical research.  Just like I don't think that they should vacuum up the electronic communications of millions of Americans. But I think that we should conduct biomedical research and I think that people should use smartphones. If only there was some way at our disposal to reel in 4th amendment violations by the intelligence community.  I mean, If only. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

17 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Confidentiality and privacy are two cornerstone principles of ethical healthcare research.  They are required matters that must be proactively addressed in every study involving human subjects research. The mention in one acontextual quote you lift really does nothing for your position. You literally have to promise that you will maintain privacy and confidentiality in every study application. (See also: 45 CFR 46 AKA the Common Rule; Belmont Report).

Amazing watching you twist yourself into a pretzel on this one over the Orange Man.  You are essentially arguing a position that would place yourself in opposition to all forms of government involvement in biomedical research. I know that you don't believe that. But you read an article on WaPo this morning and are chilled. 

It's not a acontextual.  The context is that the program will also be using personal listening devices like "Apple Watches, Fitbits, Amazon Echo and Google Home" to collect data, along with our electronic medial records.     The context is that it's the government doing this in a new, dedicated agency section, with all of the powers of government.   The context is that it's being proposed as the solution to gun violence, along with the idea of building a legion of new mental institutions.   The policy being, ban the people who might commit gun violence, not the guns. 

And this isn't just about Trump.   He's just the useful idiot who will get this ball rolling.   As you should be able to appreciate, many people on both sides have proven more than happy to expand government intrusion into our lives through surveillance as a response to a threat to public safety.   And locking crazies up in newly built mental institutions is a convenient way of getting outside of our criminal justice system.    If you aren't chilled by a dedicated government entity identifying future criminals through analysis of personal medical data and google/amazon listening devices, with the potential power fill mental institutions with potential gun threats, then I don't know why you've ever pretended to care about government surveillance at all.  

Edited August 23, 2019 by Mojo Hand

[Mojo Hand 4580]

4 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I don't believe that the NSA, CIA or FBI should vacuum up data collected during the conduct of biomedical research.  Just like I don't think that they should vacuum up the electronic communications of millions of Americans. But I think that we should conduct biomedical research and I think that people should use smartphones. If only there was some way at our disposal to reel in 4th amendment violations by the intelligence community.  I mean, If only. 

Well, one way would be to prevent the government from collecting this information in the first place.   Let private institutions conduct the research.   Fund it with government dollars.  Use the results of the studies to craft legislation.   But don't collect the data in a government agency.   Don't develop government-run "artificial intelligence" to identify "aberrant" people using data collected from Apple Watches, Google Echos, and Amazon Alexas.   The potential for abuse is limitless. 

[kevwun 15653]

Trump's new HARPA agency is going to have to recommend that he not be allowed to purchase firearms.

[WhatTheBuck 28713]

15 minutes ago, SmokeyTheBear said:

And we are supposed to take his strategy of addressing mental illness and guns in any way other than nefarious when juxtaposed against the craziness of his recent actions.

We're supposed to forget about his promise for background checks. 

[Anastasis 23394]

1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

It's not a acontextual.  The context is that the program will also be using personal listening devices like "Apple Watches, Fitbits, Amazon Echo and Google Home" to collect data, along with our electronic medial records.     The context is that it's the government doing this in a new, dedicated agency section, with all of the powers of government.   The context is that it's being proposed as the solution to gun violence, along with the idea of building a legion of new mental institutions.   The policy being, ban the people who might commit gun violence, not the guns. 

And this isn't just about Trump.   He's just the useful idiot who will get this ball rolling.   As you should be able to appreciate, many people on both sides have proven more than happy to expand government intrusion into our lives through surveillance as a response to a threat to public safety.   And locking crazies up in newly built mental institutions is a convenient way of getting outside of our criminal justice system.    If you aren't chilled by a dedicated government entity identifying future criminals through analysis of personal medical data and google/amazon listening devices, with the potential power fill mental institutions with potential gun threats, then I don't know why you've ever pretended to care about government surveillance at all.  

LOL. The quote was completely acontextual from the WaPo piece. You pulled a snip from the proposal document and assigned nefarious intent. 

And you ask me if I read the article? I put it behind the spoiler tags for people who might not have access.

HARPA is a DARPA-like initiative to address specific problems in healthcare through advanced research engaging academic-private-public partners.

Given the current political environment, where people from the left in particular bemoan the lack of epidemiological research related to gun violence, they have added a proposed component to conduct research involving advanced analytics to research gun violence.

There is nothing about government surveillance, pre-crime, and locking people up in mental institutions. They are proposing the exact type of government research on gun violence that people like you have criticized people on the right for stifling. 

BUT THEY MENTIONED PRIVACY IN THE SUMMARY PROPOSAL!!  WHAT OTHER PURPOSE IS THERE THAN TO INVADE PRIVACY AND LOCK PEOPLE UP IN MENTAL INSTITUTIONS FOR PRE-CRIME VIOLATIONS!!

Jesus Christ. 

There is a proposal for a government entity to coordinate advanced healthcare research, including research into gun violence, and you guys lose your mind like Jade Helm no gestapo in bastropo wingnuts. They are going to lock everybody up in mental institutions! The NSA is going to mine all the data!

What a world.    

White House considers new project seeking links between mental health and violent behavior Bob Wright, the former NBC chair and a Trump friend, is one of the proposal’s supporters. By Jacqueline Alemany August 22 at 9:09 AM

 

The White House has been briefed on a proposal to develop a way to identify early signs of changes in people with mental illness that could lead to violent behavior. Supporters see the plan as a way President Trump could move the ball forward on gun control following recent mass shootings as efforts seem to be flagging to impose harsher restrictions such as background checks on gun purchases. The proposal is part of a larger initiative to establish a new agency called the Health Advanced Research Projects Agency or HARPA, which would sit inside the Health and Human Services Department. Its director would be appointed by the president, and the agency would have a separate budget, according to three people with knowledge of conversations around the plan. HARPA would be modeled on DARPA, the highly successful Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency that serves as the research arm of the Pentagon and collaborates with other federal agencies, the private sector and academia. The concept was advanced by the Suzanne Wright Foundation and first discussed by officials on the Domestic Policy Council and senior White House staffers in June 2017. But the idea has gained momentum in the wake of the latest mass shootings that killed 31 people in one weekend in El Paso and Dayton, Ohio. The Suzanne Wright Foundation re-approached the administration last week and proposed that HARPA include a “Safe Home” — “Stopping Aberrant Fatal Events by Helping Overcome Mental Extremes” — project. Officials discussed the proposal at the White House last week, said two people familiar with the discussions. These people and others spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the conversations.

 

8/23/2019 White House considers new project seeking links between mental health and violent behavior - The Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/08/22/white-house-considers-new-project-seeking-links-between-mental-health-violent-behavior/?n… 2/5 The attempt to use volunteer data to identify “neurobehavioral signs” of “someone headed toward a violent explosive act” would be a four-year project costing an estimated $40 million to $60 million, according to Geoffrey Ling, the lead scientific adviser on HARPA and a founding director of DARPA’s Biological Technologies Office. “Everybody would be a volunteer,” Ling said in an interview. “We’re not inventing new science here. We’re analyzing it so we can develop new approaches. “This is going to have to be done using scientific rigor,” he said. But there are plenty of researchers and mental health experts who believe that mental health and gun violence aren’t necessarily linked. Mental illness can sometimes be a factor in such violent acts, experts say, but it is rarely a predictor — most studies show that no more than a quarter of mass shooters have a diagnosed mental illness. More commonly shared attributes of mass shooters include a strong sense of resentment, desire for notoriety, obsession with other shooters, a history of domestic violence, narcissism and access to firearms. In the immediate aftermath of Dayton and El Paso, Trump said he might support background checks for all gun purchases and “red flag” laws to deny guns to those deemed a hazard to themselves or others. But Trump on Tuesday called universal background checks off the table in a conversation with the head of the National Rifle Association, though he later denied saying that. The president has said he thinks mentally ill people are primarily responsible for the spate of mass shootings in the United States. And this proposal is likely to be welcomed by Republicans and gun-rights activists who have argued the same thing. “We’re looking at the whole gun situation,” Trump said last week. “I do want people to remember the words ‘mental illness.’ These people are mentally ill. . . . I think we have to start building institutions again because, you know, if you look at the ’60s and ’70s, so many of these institutions were closed.” Trump has reacted “very positively” to the HARPA proposal, according to a person with knowledge of the discussions and has been “sold on the concept.” But it’s unclear whether the president has reviewed the new “Safe Home” component of the proposal and creating an entire agency would be a huge lift in Congress.

 

8/23/2019 White House considers new project seeking links between mental health and violent behavior - The Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/08/22/white-house-considers-new-project-seeking-links-between-mental-health-violent-behavior/?n… 3/5 “Every time this has been brought up inside the White House — even up to the presidential level, it’s been very well-received,” a person familiar with discussions said. “HARPA is the health-care equivalent of DARPA, and it’s a great legacy project for the president, one he is uniquely positioned to get done.” That person said that Trump could benefit in a variety of ways from getting behind a project like HARPA right now. “There is no doubt that addressing this issue helps the president deal with two issues he has yet to find real success on: one is the health-care front and one is on the gun-violence front,” the person added. Trump has a close personal relationship with Bob Wright, who founded the Suzanne Wright Foundation after his wife passed away from pancreatic cancer. Wright is the former chair of NBC and was in that job while Trump headlined “The Apprentice." Wright sees Ivanka Trump as the most effective champion of the proposal and has previously briefed her on HARPA himself, Wright said. “It would be perfect for her to do it — we need someone with some horsepower — someone like her driving it. ... It could get done,” said one official familiar with the conversations. “We’d be able to put every resource of federal government, from the highest levels of the scientific community to say: ‘This is how people with these problems should be treated and have limited access to firearms.’ ” The HARPA proposal was initially pitched as a project to improve the mortality rate of pancreatic cancer through innovative research to better detect and cure diseases. Despite internal support over the past two years, the model ran into what was described as “institutional barriers to progress,” according to a person familiar with the conversations. “He’s very achievement oriented and I think all presidents have difficulties with science,” Wright said in an interview. “I think their political advisers say, ‘No that’s not a game for you,’ so they sort of back off a bit.” He added: “But the president has a real opportunity here to leave a legacy in health care.”

 

8/23/2019 White House considers new project seeking links between mental health and violent behavior - The Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/08/22/white-house-considers-new-project-seeking-links-between-mental-health-violent-behavior/?n… 4/5 The idea is for the agency to develop a “sensor suite” using advanced artificial intelligence to try to identify changes in mental status that could make an individual more prone to violent behavior. The research would ultimately be opened to the public. HARPA would develop “breakthrough technologies with high specificity and sensitivity for early diagnosis of neuropsychiatric violence,” says a copy of the proposal. “A multi-modality solution, along with real-time data analytics, is needed to achieve such an accurate diagnosis.” The document goes on to list a number of widely used technologies it suggests could be employed to help collect data, including Apple Watches, Fitbits, Amazon Echo and Google Home. The document also mentions “powerful tools” collected by health-care provides like fMRIs, tractography and image analysis. “Advanced analytical tools based on artificial intelligence and machine learning are rapidly improving and must be applied to the data,” states the document. Those familiar with the project stressed it would not collect sensitive health data about individuals without their permission. The government is simply trying to identify risk factors when it comes to mental health that could indicate violent behavior, they said. “Privacy must be safeguarded. Profiling must be avoided. Data protection capabilities will be the cornerstone of Privacy this effort.”Proponents of the plan say that an agency like HARPA, which applies technology being used in other fields to develop medical breakthroughs, is long overdue. “DARPA is a brilliant model that works. They have developed the most transformational capabilities in the world for national security,” said Liz Feld, the president of the Suzanne Wright Foundation, saying those techniques had yet to be applied to health care. “We’re not leveraging the tools and technologies available to us to improve and save lives.”

 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

Just now, Anastasis said:

LOL. The quote was completely acontextual from the WaPo piece. You pulled a snip from the proposal document and assigned nefarious intent. 

And you ask me if I read the article? I put it behind the spoiler tags for people who might not have access.

HARPA is a DARPA-like initiative to address specific problems in healthcare through advanced research engaging academic-private-public partners.

Given the current political environment, where people from the left in particular bemoan the lack of epidemiological research related to gun violence, they have added a proposed component to conduct research involving advanced analytics to research gun violence.

There is nothing about government surveillance, pre-crime, and locking people up in mental institutions. They are proposing the exact type of government research on gun violence that people like you have criticized people on the right for stifling. 

BUT THEY MENTIONED PRIVACY IN THE SUMMARY PROPOSAL!!  WHAT OTHER PURPOSE IS THERE THAN TO INVADE PRIVACY AND LOCK PEOPLE UP IN MENTAL INSTITUTIONS FOR PRE-CRIME VIOLATIONS!!

Jesus Christ. 

There is a proposal for a government entity to coordinate advanced healthcare research, including research into gun violence, and you guys lose your mind like Jade Helm no gestapo in bastropo wingnuts. They are going to lock everybody up in mental institutions! The NSA is going to mine all the data!

What a world.    

 

  Reveal hidden contents

White House considers new project seeking links between mental health and violent behavior Bob Wright, the former NBC chair and a Trump friend, is one of the proposal’s supporters. By Jacqueline Alemany August 22 at 9:09 AM

 

The White House has been briefed on a proposal to develop a way to identify early signs of changes in people with mental illness that could lead to violent behavior. Supporters see the plan as a way President Trump could move the ball forward on gun control following recent mass shootings as efforts seem to be flagging to impose harsher restrictions such as background checks on gun purchases. The proposal is part of a larger initiative to establish a new agency called the Health Advanced Research Projects Agency or HARPA, which would sit inside the Health and Human Services Department. Its director would be appointed by the president, and the agency would have a separate budget, according to three people with knowledge of conversations around the plan. HARPA would be modeled on DARPA, the highly successful Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency that serves as the research arm of the Pentagon and collaborates with other federal agencies, the private sector and academia. The concept was advanced by the Suzanne Wright Foundation and first discussed by officials on the Domestic Policy Council and senior White House staffers in June 2017. But the idea has gained momentum in the wake of the latest mass shootings that killed 31 people in one weekend in El Paso and Dayton, Ohio. The Suzanne Wright Foundation re-approached the administration last week and proposed that HARPA include a “Safe Home” — “Stopping Aberrant Fatal Events by Helping Overcome Mental Extremes” — project. Officials discussed the proposal at the White House last week, said two people familiar with the discussions. These people and others spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the conversations.

 

8/23/2019 White House considers new project seeking links between mental health and violent behavior - The Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/08/22/white-house-considers-new-project-seeking-links-between-mental-health-violent-behavior/?n… 2/5 The attempt to use volunteer data to identify “neurobehavioral signs” of “someone headed toward a violent explosive act” would be a four-year project costing an estimated $40 million to $60 million, according to Geoffrey Ling, the lead scientific adviser on HARPA and a founding director of DARPA’s Biological Technologies Office. “Everybody would be a volunteer,” Ling said in an interview. “We’re not inventing new science here. We’re analyzing it so we can develop new approaches. “This is going to have to be done using scientific rigor,” he said. But there are plenty of researchers and mental health experts who believe that mental health and gun violence aren’t necessarily linked. Mental illness can sometimes be a factor in such violent acts, experts say, but it is rarely a predictor — most studies show that no more than a quarter of mass shooters have a diagnosed mental illness. More commonly shared attributes of mass shooters include a strong sense of resentment, desire for notoriety, obsession with other shooters, a history of domestic violence, narcissism and access to firearms. In the immediate aftermath of Dayton and El Paso, Trump said he might support background checks for all gun purchases and “red flag” laws to deny guns to those deemed a hazard to themselves or others. But Trump on Tuesday called universal background checks off the table in a conversation with the head of the National Rifle Association, though he later denied saying that. The president has said he thinks mentally ill people are primarily responsible for the spate of mass shootings in the United States. And this proposal is likely to be welcomed by Republicans and gun-rights activists who have argued the same thing. “We’re looking at the whole gun situation,” Trump said last week. “I do want people to remember the words ‘mental illness.’ These people are mentally ill. . . . I think we have to start building institutions again because, you know, if you look at the ’60s and ’70s, so many of these institutions were closed.” Trump has reacted “very positively” to the HARPA proposal, according to a person with knowledge of the discussions and has been “sold on the concept.” But it’s unclear whether the president has reviewed the new “Safe Home” component of the proposal and creating an entire agency would be a huge lift in Congress.

 

8/23/2019 White House considers new project seeking links between mental health and violent behavior - The Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/08/22/white-house-considers-new-project-seeking-links-between-mental-health-violent-behavior/?n… 3/5 “Every time this has been brought up inside the White House — even up to the presidential level, it’s been very well-received,” a person familiar with discussions said. “HARPA is the health-care equivalent of DARPA, and it’s a great legacy project for the president, one he is uniquely positioned to get done.” That person said that Trump could benefit in a variety of ways from getting behind a project like HARPA right now. “There is no doubt that addressing this issue helps the president deal with two issues he has yet to find real success on: one is the health-care front and one is on the gun-violence front,” the person added. Trump has a close personal relationship with Bob Wright, who founded the Suzanne Wright Foundation after his wife passed away from pancreatic cancer. Wright is the former chair of NBC and was in that job while Trump headlined “The Apprentice." Wright sees Ivanka Trump as the most effective champion of the proposal and has previously briefed her on HARPA himself, Wright said. “It would be perfect for her to do it — we need someone with some horsepower — someone like her driving it. ... It could get done,” said one official familiar with the conversations. “We’d be able to put every resource of federal government, from the highest levels of the scientific community to say: ‘This is how people with these problems should be treated and have limited access to firearms.’ ” The HARPA proposal was initially pitched as a project to improve the mortality rate of pancreatic cancer through innovative research to better detect and cure diseases. Despite internal support over the past two years, the model ran into what was described as “institutional barriers to progress,” according to a person familiar with the conversations. “He’s very achievement oriented and I think all presidents have difficulties with science,” Wright said in an interview. “I think their political advisers say, ‘No that’s not a game for you,’ so they sort of back off a bit.” He added: “But the president has a real opportunity here to leave a legacy in health care.”

 

8/23/2019 White House considers new project seeking links between mental health and violent behavior - The Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/08/22/white-house-considers-new-project-seeking-links-between-mental-health-violent-behavior/?n… 4/5 The idea is for the agency to develop a “sensor suite” using advanced artificial intelligence to try to identify changes in mental status that could make an individual more prone to violent behavior. The research would ultimately be opened to the public. HARPA would develop “breakthrough technologies with high specificity and sensitivity for early diagnosis of neuropsychiatric violence,” says a copy of the proposal. “A multi-modality solution, along with real-time data analytics, is needed to achieve such an accurate diagnosis.” The document goes on to list a number of widely used technologies it suggests could be employed to help collect data, including Apple Watches, Fitbits, Amazon Echo and Google Home. The document also mentions “powerful tools” collected by health-care provides like fMRIs, tractography and image analysis. “Advanced analytical tools based on artificial intelligence and machine learning are rapidly improving and must be applied to the data,” states the document. Those familiar with the project stressed it would not collect sensitive health data about individuals without their permission. The government is simply trying to identify risk factors when it comes to mental health that could indicate violent behavior, they said. “Privacy must be safeguarded. Profiling must be avoided. Data protection capabilities will be the cornerstone of Privacy this effort.”Proponents of the plan say that an agency like HARPA, which applies technology being used in other fields to develop medical breakthroughs, is long overdue. “DARPA is a brilliant model that works. They have developed the most transformational capabilities in the world for national security,” said Liz Feld, the president of the Suzanne Wright Foundation, saying those techniques had yet to be applied to health care. “We’re not leveraging the tools and technologies available to us to improve and save lives.”

 

 

Ooh, it's a "DARPA-like initiative."   Keep repeating that, it sounds much better than actually paying attention to the details.   I mean, you don't (and didn't) have to say one word about the development of a government artificial intelligence system to identify aberrant people using their personal home listening devices.   It's a DARPA-like initiative!   Merely applied to using our personal health information and private conversations to identify which of us might be dangerous in the future.   Don't worry.  It's a DARPA-like initiative! 

[Anastasis 23394]

4 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Ooh, it's a "DARPA-like initiative."   Keep repeating that, it sounds much better than actually paying attention to the details.   I mean, you don't (and didn't) have to say one word about the development of a government artificial intelligence system to identify aberrant people using their personal home listening devices.   It's a DARPA-like initiative!   Merely applied to using our personal health information and private conversations to identify which of us might be dangerous in the future.   Don't worry.  It's a DARPA-like initiative! 

We want more government research on gun violence! Why does the Right always shut it down.

Here is a reasonable mechanism to do that involving public-private-academic partnerships to engage advanced analytics within DHS, operating under the principles and DHS regulations that govern biomedical research.

NO GESTAPO IN BASTROPO!

Edited August 23, 2019 by Anastasis

[UncleCharlie 334]

Yo, CIA....if you're out there.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

Just now, Anastasis said:

We want more government research on gun violence! Why does the Right always shut it down.

Here is a reasonable mechanism to do that involving public-private-academic partnerships to engage advanced analytics within DHS, operating under the principles and DHS regulations that govern biomedical research.

NO GESTAPO IN BASTROPO!

At least we all know now that you're full of shit on government surveillance, along with everything else.    "Advanced analytics," meaning government-run artificial intelligence to identify aberrant people before they commit crimes using data from Apple Watches, Google Echos, and Amazon Alexas.  Surveillence (with a privacy promise!) and predictive AI is the same thing as government dollars funding private research into gun violence because... well, it just is! 

[Anastasis 23394]

11 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

At least we all know now that you're full of shit on government surveillance, along with everything else.    "Advanced analytics," meaning government-run artificial intelligence to identify aberrant people before they commit crimes using data from Apple Watches, Google Echos, and Amazon Alexas.  Surveillence (with a privacy promise!) and predictive AI is the same thing as government dollars funding private research into gun violence because... well, it just is! 

Biomedical research, conducted according to the principles embodied in the Common Rule and the Belmont Report, whether conducted by a private party with government funding or a government entity, is not "government surveillance."  Your brain worms are showing.  Your position appears to be based on a conspiratorial notion that human subjects research conducted within DHS will not adhere to the DHS regulations that govern human subjects research. Your evidence? The proposal explicitly commits to conducting the research according to these regulations and principles. Really amazing pretzel you worked yourself into here. We better shut down the CDC, NIH, NIMH, etc.  

Edited August 23, 2019 by Anastasis

[lemonlime 5503]

40 minutes ago, kevwun said:

Trump's new HARPA agency is going to have to recommend that he not be allowed to purchase firearms.

We'll just give him the nuclear arsenal instead.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

Biomedical research, conducted according to the principles embodied in the Common Rule and the Belmont Report, whether conducted by a private party with government funding or a government entity, are not "government surveillance."  Your brain worms are showing.  Your position appears to be based on a conspiratorial notion that human subjects research conducted within DHS will not adhere to the DHS regulations that govern human subjects research. Your evidence? The proposal explicitly commits to conducting the research according to these regulations and principles. Really amazing pretzel you worked yourself into here. We better shut down the CDC, NIH, NIMH, etc.  

No, my evidence is that the program explicitly proposes the very thing I am concerned about.   If those other entities you point to are using artificial intelligence to identify aberrant people with data collected from their home listening devices, let me know the name of the programs so I can oppose them too. 

[SmokeyTheBear 5562]

3 hours ago, Anastasis said:

Biomedical research, conducted according to the principles embodied in the Common Rule and the Belmont Report, whether conducted by a private party with government funding or a government entity, is not "government surveillance."  Your brain worms are showing.  Your position appears to be based on a conspiratorial notion that human subjects research conducted within DHS will not adhere to the DHS regulations that govern human subjects research. Your evidence? The proposal explicitly commits to conducting the research according to these regulations and principles. Really amazing pretzel you worked yourself into here. We better shut down the CDC, NIH, NIMH, etc.  

I think the issue at hand is that your position historically has been the assumption that elements of the government do not adhere to rules and regulations that govern information gathering related to FISA. The same standard you set could easily be transferred to this issue. Yet, you are all in on it. 

Edited August 23, 2019 by SmokeyTheBear

[wildcat09 29257]

Just now, SmokeyTheBear said:

I think the issue at hand is that your position historically has been the assumption that elements of the government do not adhere to rules and regulations that govern information gathering related to FISA. The same standard you set could easily transferred to this issue. Yet, you are all in on it. 

Are you remotely surprised?

[Anastasis 23394]

Just now, SmokeyTheBear said:

I think the issue at hand is that your position historically has been the assumption that elements of the government do not adhere to rules and regulations that govern information gathering related to FISA. The same standard you set could easily transferred to this issue. Yet, you are all in on it. 

By "elements of the government", specifically, you mean the Intelligence Community (CIA, NSA, etc.).

No, I don't think that the CDC and the FDA, for example, operate in the same way as the CIA and the NSA.

What is wrong with y'all's brains?

[Irwin F Fletcher 3550]

30 minutes ago, UncleCharlie said:

Yo, CIA....if you're out there.

Yeah, what ya need? Seriously though, thanks for reaching out. We've been wanting to tell you that you should wear pants around the house, the boys back at Langley get a little uncomfortable with your short-less antics.

 

 

 

 

 

[HenryJames 65890]

2 hours ago, Anastasis said:

The HARPA initiative and the concept behind it, a DARPA-like academic-public-private push to advance biomedical research with specific and targeted goals to address healthcare needs in cancer, neurodegenerative disorders, and mental health, is worth a look. Using advanced analytics to identify a wide variety of factors associated with violence. Chilling.

They should’ve called it DERKA.

[Anastasis 23394]

1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

No, my evidence is that the program explicitly proposes the very thing I am concerned about.   If those other entities you point to are using artificial intelligence to identify aberrant people with data collected from their home listening devices, let me know the name of the programs so I can oppose them too. 

Yes, the CDC uses artificial intelligence and predictive analytics. They also have programs evaluating the use of data from wearable technology, social media, biomarkers, smartphones and apps, advanced imaging, etc. in healthcare and public health.

Here is a relatively recent paper that touches on the subject broadly:

https://www.karger.com/Article/Abstract/501465 

And a summary from the CDC site:

https://blogs.cdc.gov/genomics/2019/07/23/can-big-data-science/

[Anastasis 23394]

 

12 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Are you remotely surprised?

"If you criticize the unconstitutional surveillance state created by the IC, it is incompatible to also support government engagement in coordinating ethically conducted biomedical research to address some of our most pressing public health needs." - TotallyNormalBrains

[Anastasis 23394]

7 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

They should’ve called it DERKA.

DERPA should be on the table, imo. 

[David Dennison 18659]

2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

"If you criticize the unconstitutional surveillance state created by the IC, it is incompatible to also support government engagement in coordinating ethically conducted biomedical research to address some of our most pressing public health needs." - TotallyNormalBrains

Remember kids, it's not unconstitutional until SCOTUS says it is.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

9 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Yes, the CDC uses artificial intelligence and predictive analytics. They also have programs evaluating the use of data from wearable technology, social media, biomarkers, smartphones and apps, advanced imaging, etc. in healthcare and public health.

Here is a relatively recent paper that touches on the subject broadly:

https://www.karger.com/Article/Abstract/501465 

And a summary from the CDC site:

https://blogs.cdc.gov/genomics/2019/07/23/can-big-data-science/

And this kind of data already raises enormous privacy concerns warranting extensive oversight.  I don't want my cholesterol data being used to used to my personal detriment with respect to health insurance or health care.   But there's a big difference between striking that balance for disease prevention and identifying mental illness, literally through listening devices, to prevent crime.   The amount of exercise I get each day as tracked on my fitbit is one thing, and even that private info poses major concerns.  My interactions with my Google Echo (if I had one) is something else entirely.   The former risks sweeping up location and physical health data at most.  The latter sweeps up words and ideas by design, for public safety in an expressly criminal context. 

And you're deluding yourself if you think our intelligence and criminal justice organizations can't misuse the information collected in a DARPA-like initiative. 

[wildcat09 29257]

15 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

 

"If you criticize the unconstitutional surveillance state created by the IC, it is incompatible to also support government engagement in coordinating ethically conducted biomedical research to address some of our most pressing public health needs." - TotallyNormalBrains

"I'm naturally suspicious of all governmental activity but believe the Trump administration will absolutely comply with the strictest ethical codes of conduct in establishing its precrime program." - TotallyNormalBrains

[lemonlime 5503]

Seems like an excellent suggestion if you want to gut mental health care in this country.  Reporting people who seek help to the feds.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

18 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

 

"If you criticize the unconstitutional surveillance state created by the IC, it is incompatible to also support government engagement in coordinating ethically conducted biomedical research to address some of our most pressing public health needs." - TotallyNormalBrains

Not just coordinating private research.  Storing data and developing artificial intelligence systems to comb though Google Echo etc. data for signs of mental illness. 

[henrygandorf 29177]

rounding up 4th and 5th graders because of alarming trends in their drawings and handwriting analysis that could eventually lead them to take part in mass shootings, then bringing them all in to some blacksite and running tests on them, should be the plot of an episode of black mirror next season.

fuck it, i'll just write it.

[Anastasis 23394]

8 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

And this kind of data already raises enormous privacy concerns warranting extensive oversight. 

Yes, instituting the appropriate human subjects research protections and oversight procedures is a pre-requisite to the conduct of human subjects research. This is basic and fundamental to biomedical research. If your baseline assumption is that research conducted within the context of public-private-academic partnerships engaged by a department of DHS, such as the one proposed by the Suzanne Wright Foundation, will not be conducted according to these principles and the regulations of DHS, than I guess that is your rhetorical prerogative.  I am operating under the expectation that these protections and procedures will be in place, as is required by law and the ethical guidelines driven into the head of healthcare researchers from day 1 of their training.   

[Mojo Hand 4580]

14 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Yes, instituting the appropriate human subjects research protections and oversight procedures is a pre-requisite to the conduct of human subjects research. This is basic and fundamental to biomedical research. If your baseline assumption is that research conducted within the context of public-private-academic partnerships engaged by a department of DHS, such as the one proposed by the Suzanne Wright Foundation, will not be conducted according to these principles and the regulations of DHS, than I guess that is your rhetorical prerogative.  I am operating under the expectation that these protections and procedures will be in place, as is required by law and the ethical guidelines driven into the head of healthcare researchers from day 1 of their training.   

No, my assumption is there is a significant likelihood that tools developed by government agencies will eventually be used by our intelligence organizations and DOJ when useful to their missions.   And that the risk is almost a certainty when the very purpose of the tool is to prevent crime before it happens. 

This is, by design, the government funding and developing an artificial intelligence system to comb through data from personal computing and listening devices to identify abberant people with mental problems.  If NSA were developing it in-house, you'd freak out.  But it's all good because HHS is developing it out in the open, with greater access to smart people at research institutions and tech companies? 

In all seriousness, once the system is developed at HHS, what do you expect it to be used for?   Especially when there is an outbreak of shootings and people are desperate to stop them before they happen?    For what does the government then use an artificial intelligence system designed to analyze our web searches and physical movements and the things we say in our home?   And, if there's something worthwhile that HHS might use it for, how do you stop other, more dangerous government organizations from using it? 

Edited August 23, 2019 by Mojo Hand

[Anastasis 23394]

1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

This is, by design, the government funding and developing an artificial intelligence system to comb through data from personal computing and listening devices to identify abberant people with mental problems.

Interesting. I don't recall you going all no gestapo in bastropo when the actual DARPA was doing the same thing.  Maybe cause it was under a different administration.

https://www.darpa.mil/program/detection-and-computational-analysis-of-psychological-signals

The Detection and Computational Analysis of Psychological Signals (DCAPS) program aims to develop novel analytical tools to assess psychological status of warfighters in the hopes of improving psychological health awareness and enabling them to seek timely help.

DCAPS tools will be developed to analyze patterns in everyday behaviors to detect subtle changes associated with post-traumatic stress disorder, depression and suicidal ideation. In particular, DCAPS hopes to advance the state-of-the-art in extraction and analysis of “honest signals” from a wide variety of sensory data inherent in daily social interactions. DCAPS is not aimed at providing an exact diagnosis, but at providing a general metric of psychological health.

DCAPS also aims to develop novel algorithms for detecting distress cues from users who opt in to provide data such as text and voice communications, daily patterns of sleeping, eating, social interactions and online behaviors, and nonverbal cues such as facial expression, posture and body movement. The outcomes of these analytical algorithms would be correlated with distress markers from neurological sensors for improved understanding of distress cues.

Privacy and security are of paramount concern to the DCAPS program. Program data will be collected with the informed consent of individuals involved and stored in a secure, private data-sharing framework. DCAPS will develop, in conjunction with leading privacy experts, a novel trust framework such as envisioned in the National Strategy for Secure Identity in Cyberspace. This trust framework will allow warfighters to control and safely share their “honest signals” data.

 

Wait, wait, wait.  They said that privacy and data security and informed consent were of paramount concern? Clearly they were stipulating such specifically to obfuscate their real intent. 

 

13 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

In all seriousness, once the system is developed at HHS, what do you expect it to be used for? 

I think that the findings of the research could potentially yield insights into the complex social, biological, and behavioral factors that may be related to explosive gun violence. I think that developing those insights, within the context of ethically conducted human subjects research with appropriate oversight and informed consent, is a good thing.  I think that carrying out similar research into PTSD and depression and suicidality among returning soldiers was a good thing under Obama.  I think that carrying out advanced research related to gun violence likewise has merits.  More broadly, I think that the capabilities of such an initiative to address issues in oncology and neurodegenerative disorders, which is where the whole concept originated, is vastly more important and impactful to be honest.  

  

 

 

 

 

[JimmyJames 12271]

Having thoroughly reviewed this thread, as your leader, I hereby order two things happen on surly:

1) anastasis be immediately rounded up and sent to a trump-run mental institution for suspicion of pre-crime:

2) all of you wear a tan suit tonight for your hot dog with mustard only dinner. 

That is all. Carry on. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

Interesting. I don't recall you going all no gestapo in bastropo when the actual DARPA was doing the same thing.  Maybe cause it was under a different administration.

https://www.darpa.mil/program/detection-and-computational-analysis-of-psychological-signals

The Detection and Computational Analysis of Psychological Signals (DCAPS) program aims to develop novel analytical tools to assess psychological status of warfighters in the hopes of improving psychological health awareness and enabling them to seek timely help.

DCAPS tools will be developed to analyze patterns in everyday behaviors to detect subtle changes associated with post-traumatic stress disorder, depression and suicidal ideation. In particular, DCAPS hopes to advance the state-of-the-art in extraction and analysis of “honest signals” from a wide variety of sensory data inherent in daily social interactions. DCAPS is not aimed at providing an exact diagnosis, but at providing a general metric of psychological health.

DCAPS also aims to develop novel algorithms for detecting distress cues from users who opt in to provide data such as text and voice communications, daily patterns of sleeping, eating, social interactions and online behaviors, and nonverbal cues such as facial expression, posture and body movement. The outcomes of these analytical algorithms would be correlated with distress markers from neurological sensors for improved understanding of distress cues.

Privacy and security are of paramount concern to the DCAPS program. Program data will be collected with the informed consent of individuals involved and stored in a secure, private data-sharing framework. DCAPS will develop, in conjunction with leading privacy experts, a novel trust framework such as envisioned in the National Strategy for Secure Identity in Cyberspace. This trust framework will allow warfighters to control and safely share their “honest signals” data.

 

Wait, wait, wait.  They said that privacy and data security and informed consent were of paramount concern? Clearly they were stipulating such specifically to obfuscate their real intent. 

 

I think that the findings of the research could potentially yield insights into the complex social, biological, and behavioral factors that may be related to explosive gun violence. I think that developing those insights, within the context of ethically conducted human subjects research with appropriate oversight and informed consent, is a good thing.  I think that carrying out similar research into PTSD and depression and suicidality among returning soldiers was a good thing under Obama.  I think that carrying out advanced research related to gun violence likewise has merits.  More broadly, I think that the capabilities of such an initiative to address issues in oncology and neurodegenerative disorders, which is where the whole concept originated, is vastly more important and impactful to be honest.  

  

 

 

 

 

I've never mentioned that program because I've never heard of it.   I know about HARPA because I read it in the Washington Post.   It has nothing to do with what administration it was; I roundly criticized the Obama administration for the activities that Edward Snowden revealed and even said I would vote for Rand Paul in 2016, in no small part because of this issue (which I now regret after realizing I was foolish for believing him to be for real).  You literally have no other gear for debate other than "You only care when it's a Republican!!!"

And the government's ability to read facial expressions through video surveillance is very concerning. I'd be shocked if the data from that program hasn't already made its way into alternative uses.   Why would you think that "DCAPS" justifies the development of even more advanced tools to identify people with aberrant thoughts?    If that were the standard, there should no limit to government intrusion because of the things Snowden exposed.  We need to think about privacy more now, not less. 

[Anastasis 23394]

OK, let's shift gears @Mojo Hand.  What kind of research into gun violence would you find acceptable?  You don't want the government engaged if it involves "advanced analytics" such as a large multi-modal dataset and machine learning analysis techniques. I assume that this excludes a broad range of data analysis techniques and cutting edge methods of data collection. What exactly is acceptable to you in terms of research into gun violence? I think that you rhetorically confuse advanced analytic methods such as machine learning with something scary sounding like an "artificial intelligence systems designed to spy on you through your echo".  I don't think that leap is supported by what I read in the article, but I am curious as to what type of research into gun violence you think should be conducted that would not have potential for abuse by rogue government entities such as the NSA.